Powerhouse Port

Champion Data predicts Port Adelaide could become a powerhouse in coming years.

Powerhouse Port
IT IS “frightening” how good Port Adelaide could become, according to AFL’s official statistical analysis company Champion Data.
Champion’s Glenn Luff — one of the author’s of the company’s 2014 AFL Prospectus — says the age and upside of the Power’s list make it well placed to defy widespread predictions the Gold Coast are GWS are the competition’s next power clubs.
“It’s actually frightening how good they (Port) could be,’’ Luff said.
Powerhouse Port
 

Chrizzt

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 17, 2009
8,895
18,208
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
CD have been harping on for the last few years that the young talent on our list was showing signs.
The prospectus will certainly provide a good read at the end of the year.
 
WTF is so frightening how good Port's list could be?

Surly isn't it just a natural progression - you have few s**t years - get a few high draft picks - nail them and then get some really good 2nd and 3rd rounders and 5 or 6 years later they start jelling and you keep adding to your stocks.
 
Last edited:

*PAF

Brownlow Medallist
10k Posts Port Adelaide - Nathan Krakouer Player Sponsor 2015 Port Adelaide - Brendon AhChee Player Sponsor 2014 Port Adelaide - Jarrad Redden Player Sponsor 2014 Port Adelaide - Matthew Broadbent Player Sponsor 2013 Port Adelaide - Foundation Sponsor Port Adelaide - Captains Club 2012 Sponsor Port Adelaide - John Butcher 2012 Player Sponsor
Feb 17, 2005
22,024
10,285
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Hehe.
Looks as if REH borrowed my little phone and fat fingers.
 

jordz82

Club Legend
Apr 13, 2013
1,313
1,390
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Hehe.
Looks as if REH borrowed my little phone and fat fingers.
Surly-Duff.jpg
 
CD have been harping on for the last few years that the young talent on our list was showing signs.
The prospectus will certainly provide a good read at the end of the year.
Not really, they've been bleating on about how poor our list is since this yearly paid advertisement first surfaced (when in reality they're just regurgitating supercoach points, and don't factor in age profile or "potential" one iota).

Their assessment of list condition is meaningless
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #11
Champion Data is a lag indicator measure of player performance. They don't set themselves up as the predictors of future performance or player potential.

What they do is tell you in empirical statistical terms where your players sit in relation to the rest of the competition. There was a lot of complaining that at the end of last season Monfries was our only 'elite' player. But in simple statistical terms by their guidelines that was the case.

What they are seeing this year is a number of our players, young players, are trending upwards in their performance and relative to their peer groups. That is very good news. And they will interpret that as being a good lead indicator for future performance because there is room for continued growth in young players.

If we had a group that was remaining stagnant you could say that is a concern because often a club will hang its hat on a young list but if that youth is not improving they are a young list that will need culling at some point and to start again.
 
Champion Data is a lag indicator measure of player performance. They don't set themselves up as the predictors of future performance or player potential.

What they do is tell you in empirical statistical terms where your players sit in relation to the rest of the competition. There was a lot of complaining that at the end of last season Monfries was our only 'elite' player. But in simple statistical terms by their guidelines that was the case.

What they are seeing this year is a number of our players, young players, are trending upwards in their performance and relative to their peer groups. That is very good news. And they will interpret that as being a good lead indicator for future performance because there is room for continued growth in young players.

If we had a group that was remaining stagnant you could say that is a concern because often a club will hang its hat on a young list but if that youth is not improving they are a young list that will need culling at some point and to start again.

I have no problem with CD coming out at the start of each year saying these are the elite players of the comp , these are above average, these are average ones etc based on the previous 2 years with more weighting to last year over 2 years ago etc.

But I don't get the frightening comment. What are they frightened of? Its just natural progression.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #14
I have no problem with CD coming out at the start of each year saying these are the elite players of the comp , these are above average, these are average ones etc based on the previous 2 years with more weighting to last year over 2 years ago etc.

But I don't get the frightening comment. What are they frightened of? Its just natural progression.

It's a standard bit of commentary to call something looming large in the rear view mirror 'frightening'. They are implying it's frightening for the rest of the comp how good we could be especially when all the attention has been on Gold Coast and GWS.
 
Apr 27, 2002
15,164
11,019
2004 Premiers
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Edmonton Oilers, Newcastle
But I don't get the frightening comment. What are they frightened of? Its just natural progression.
Well, it's just an expression. But if you tried to pin it down, perhaps it's frightening how much their own personal favorite teams could be dominated by an ever-improving Port.

Edit: Beaten to the punch by Frodo.
 
Yeah its unnecessary BS hype. Just like the GC and GWS have so much talent they will win a premiership in 5 years time hype. 4 years on GC are struggling to make the finals for the first time.
 
Jan 30, 2013
16,166
16,559
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
did this yesterday comparing Port 2015 to Geelong 2007. was for another reason but it seemed interesting with similarities for this thread.
ccc.png

apologies to positional arrangements of geelong '07 some were hard to place and others are not well known.
 
Aug 22, 2011
7,474
14,613
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Just off the top of my head I reckon Boak would be only 24?
Just turned 26 yesterday he's got another 6-7 years in him if we manage him right, should be our second 300 gamer after Kornes gets there next year.

Nice little hype piece but I think we can only get better from here, it's hard to get a gauge on how much improvement is in every current player. Our core group of 19-24 year olds are as good any club in the league, we just need a back up ruck like Lycett & a ready to go KPF.
 
Last edited:
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #21
Just turned 26 yesterday he's got another 6-7 years in him if we manage him right, should be our second 300 gamer after Kornes gets there next year.

Nice little hype piece but I think we can only get better from here, it's hard to get a gauge on how much improvement is in every current player. Our core group of 19-24 year olds are as good any club in the league, we just need a back up ruck like Lycett & a ready to go KPF.

Enjoy your run? Good things happened. :D
 
the only part i dont like is that westhoff, schultzy and boak are aging.

yep, agree

we have solid replacements for Carlile with Trengove, Hombche and Clurey

I am less concerned with Boak, despite being our best midfielder, with the depth of our midfield and guys coming through

Westhoff was always going to be tough to replace as mobile 198cm guys don't come around often. I still have faith in Butcher growing into this role but nerves are setting in. May be we should be targeting Sam Reid or Lycett as a KPF who can go into the ruck.

what really scares me is Schulz. Hopefully Mason and Harvey establish themselves but feel Mason might move on. We probably need to recruit some one here too but have no idea who.
 
Apr 16, 2009
1,597
2,907
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Champion Data is a lag indicator measure of player performance. They don't set themselves up as the predictors of future performance or player potential.

What they do is tell you in empirical statistical terms where your players sit in relation to the rest of the competition. There was a lot of complaining that at the end of last season Monfries was our only 'elite' player. But in simple statistical terms by their guidelines that was the case.

What they are seeing this year is a number of our players, young players, are trending upwards in their performance and relative to their peer groups. That is very good news. And they will interpret that as being a good lead indicator for future performance because there is room for continued growth in young players.

If we had a group that was remaining stagnant you could say that is a concern because often a club will hang its hat on a young list but if that youth is not improving they are a young list that will need culling at some point and to start again.

i was disappointed with the article. i don't have a problem with champion data presenting their data for what it is - as you say, a lagging indicator.

in this case though, they've planted a story about their stats painting a picture of a frighteningly good port side in years to come - but the 'analysis' is little more than 'several of their players have improved their ranking position, and by the way did you know they are a young side?'. any mug could tell you the same thing by looking at the ladder and the age profile of the list.

what they could have done is used their extensive historical data on players to create a predictive model based on age/experience/position and existing data on each player to produce an estimate of expected performance in the future. this probably wouldn't be very useful applied to individual players as there's too much variance (good and bad seasons, injuries, and some players just end up much better or worse than expected), but when averaged over a whole list of 40 players i'd imagine you'd get a very good indication of how good that list will be in several years time.

that would have been interesting. but they haven't done that. the article doesn't really say anything that anyone with two eyes couldn't figure out for themselves.
 
Last edited:
Back